I think for the most part you're conflating. No hate here, but you seem to be doing the same thing you're accusing women of doing about not being able to separate individual men from men as a group.

I guess I have to go back through the comments of that first article again, but I don't recall any women respondants saying what you're saying they said here. And I read every one of them thst was there when I left mine. And went back through them once after that once Mark Manning made me aware that you reslonded to my comment under the main comment thread instead of under mine so I didn't see it. Or so he though. I thought is was kind of general addresses myself. But whatever.

I still return to 'like' is ambiguous. You kind of blew that off but I say again, 'like' how? If i knew what you meant, I wouldn't have asked for clarification in the first place.

To that point, in this one it seems like you think men should get a cookie or a gold star for being the creative impetus behind civilization. Supposedly.

Outside of being massively tone deaf ,(Lawd, I rolled my eyeballs so hard they nearly got stuck. Mama warned me about dudes like you) , this is a conflation again. If you want to be seen as individuals rather than a group in order to avoid being held responsible for the sins of a few men, or whatever....then why do you always insist on getting a dispersement of brownie points as individuals for things you believe men as a group should get credit for?

Make up your mind. Pick one and stay there.

Pro tip, constantly shifting goal posts and creating double standards anytime anyone turns around to advantage yourselves doesn't exactly foster fond feelings for men, either as individuals or as a collective.

Just saying.